II or III RP?

REPEAL

SENAT OF THE REPUBLIC OF POLAND

of 16 April 1998

about the legal continuity between II and III Republic of Poland.

1. The legislature recognizes the state created as a consequence of planet War II on Polish lands and functioning in 1944-1989 as an undemocratic state with a totalitarian strategy of power, which is part of the planet communist system, devoid of sovereignty and not fulfilling the principles of the sovereignty of the Nation.

2. Senate acknowledges Legal continuity of the II and III Republic of Poland, expressed in their sovereign and independent being. Thus, he states that the Constitution of the non-divide state imposed on 22 July 1952 did not legally undermine the legal power of the Constitutional Law of the Republic of Poland of 23 April 1935 and its legal order.

3. The legislature expresses its gratitude to the authorities of the Polish state in exile, which, acting on the basis of the April Constitution of 1935, enabled the legal continuity between II and III of the Republic of Poland, as well as to all those who fought in the country and abroad, contributed to the restoration of independency and sovereignty of the Republic of Poland.

4. The legislature states that the normative acts made up by the non-sworn legislature from 1944 to 1989 are devoid of legal power if they reconcile with the sovereign existence of the Polish state or are contrary to the principles of law recognised by civilized nations, expressed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This applies in peculiar to normative acts violating fundamental rights and civilian liberties. These include acts depriving Polish citizenship, making criminal law a tool for the persecution of people who fight for independency or differing beliefs of the worldview, as well as acts on the basis of which unfair deprivation of property was made. The nullity of these normative acts of statutory rank requires a statutory message and another normative acts - a decision of the competent authorities of the state. At the same time, it should be ensured that rights wrongly received are restored and that acquired rights are protected on the basis of acts declared invalid unless the acquisition was wrong.

-------------

reprint

February 27, 2020


Today I came across the publication of the paper "Rzeczpospolita" dated on X 2019, in which the author, Hubert Koziej, writes about how the April Constitution of 1935 was treated in the 3rd Polish Republic, the last constitution in force in the independent II Polish Republic. At first, Koziej praises this constitution as very good, due to the fact that it gives basis for strong power. So strong that the president of the Republic only responded to “God and history” and could, in fact, solve Parliament freely. The author didn't mention it, but let's leave it at that due to the fact that that's not what I want to focus on.

I'm not an educated lawyer, but I had a subject in college called the basics of legislation, so I have any basic thought of law. According to what I have been taught, the government (the law, the regulation and the constitution) is inactive in force until the laws which have been adopted and put into effect. For example, erstwhile the fresh Waste Act entered into force in 2013, it included a evidence that it was losing power of the existing Waste Act of 2001 (some of the provisions of the erstwhile Waste Act according to the fresh Law lost power later, but it is the rule itself). It is simply a alleged derogation, that is, the fresh law cancels the old law. The same applies to the Constitution, and so also, and possibly in particular, the Constitution of 23 April 1935. As in 2013, it could not be considered from specified a point of view that, for example, since 01/01/2014, the 2001 Waste Act ceases to apply due to the fact that we like it so much, it cannot be done in the case of the Constitution.

And how was it done in the 3rd Poland? It has just been recognized that the Constitution of 23 April 1935 does not apply and, in colloquially speaking, it was abandoned. The 1997 Constitution presently utilized in Poland (sometimes called the Kwasniewski Constitution) refers to a tiny 1992 constitution, and this 1 refers to the Stalinese Constitution of 22.07.1952. The Stalinist constitution refers to the March Constitution of 1921. The 1997 Constitution at the end has a evidence that the legal validity of the small constitution of 1992 is lost, and that of the Constitution of 23 April 1935 is not a word.
In order to make it even more interesting, it is simply a tiny 1992 constitution on the basis of which the 1997 Constitution presently utilized in Poland refers to the illegal constitution of the totalitarian state. In 1947 elections were held in Stalinist Poland, which were completely falsified by the Soviets (according to Stalin's rule that no substance who and how votes, but who counts the votes). So the communists ruled Poland for more than 40 years against the will of the Polish people and never had any rights to do so and all the laws that they established in Poland were invalid, including their 1952 constitution. So Kwasniewski's constitution was passed on the basis of an illegal Stalinist constitution!

There is 1 more thing to mention here about the basics of legislation. The Constitution is the highest legal act and its validity can only be abolished by a law of the same rank, another constitution. In accordance with the rule of derogation, there should be a mention in the fresh constitution to the old constitution and at the end there should be a evidence of the failure of legal power by the old constitution. Where, then, is this provision in the case of the Constitution of April 1935? The answer is: NEVER! Neither in the 1952 illegal constitution, nor in the 1992 tiny constitution, nor in the 1997 law abolishing the 1935 Constitution. Thus, in accordance with the law, the 1935 Constitution is inactive in force today. Only it is not used, due to the fact that this is the imagination of the presently ruling entity called the III Republic. And in the article this is all described and this part of the article is entitled “democratic negligence”.

This unfortunate III of the Republic of Poland based its constitution on this Stalinist 1 from 1952 is not the heir of independent II of Poland, but totalitarian and illegal PRL. And if so, there is no legal continuity between the II of Poland and III of Poland. Thus, the III Republic of Poland is not the legal heir of the II Republic of Poland. What does that mean? This means that all the PiS talk about war reparations from Germany is worth a pound of wads. Germany will not pay us a penny, due to the fact that the current Polish authorities are not the legal heirs of the Second Republic, but the Polish People's Republic. And as we know, Germany destroyed the Second Republic of Poland, not the Polish People's Republic. That's it. Don't let anyone number on any reparations.

So what should I do? It is essential to reconstruct the legal continuity between the II Polish Republic and III Polish Republic and thus legalise the Polish authorities. The current authorities are truly an extension of the business authorities of Poland from 1944 to 1989. The name of the state, the emblem and the alleged democracy were changed, but nothing truly changed. The III of Poland was and is only a pusher and puppet of another countries and our authorities truly despise. And it does not only apply to the US, but even to specified "powers" as Ukraine or Lithuania. Why is that? That is why – the planet knows that our power is illegal and does not truly represent the Polish nation. And since the ruling III of the Republic of Poland is simply a selling scumbag, that's what it is. And it's better not to, or alternatively worse until we wake up and realize it.

How do we reconstruct this continuity and legalize the authorities? We gotta start by choosing the president. He must take his oath to the 1935 April Constitution. He should then dissolve Parliament and the elections should be held and the Sejm and the legislature elected according to the principles of the Constitution of 23 April 1935, and all Members and Senators should take an oath in accordance with the Constitution of 23 April 1935. Only specified elected authorities will be legal heirs of the Second Polish Republic. A fresh constitution should then be passed according to the principles of the 1935 Constitution and the application of the 1935 Constitution should be abolished by an appropriate provision in the fresh constitution. And the 1997 Kwasniewski Constitution should go where it belongs, that is, to the garbage can.

Today, in fact, if individual insisted, they could say that all authorities and legal acts and authorities have been illegal since 1944, due to the fact that they were not elected on the basis of the 1935 Constitution. And now let any justice prove it's not. Thus, it is de facto possible to refuse to exercise any orders and not apply any law presently applicable in Poland and trust on the Decree of 30.11.1939 for the annulment of the acts of the business authorities. The current authorities of the III Republic are actually occupying authorities, and the Constitution of 1935 on the basis of which the decree was issued inactive applies this and the decree itself applies. However, I do not urge doing so due to the fact that the repression apparatus is on the side of these business authorities. You can effort the courts. I wonder how they will respond to this argument.

There is inactive a question as the author of the “time of the self-sustainers” states. In 1972, Juliusz Nowin Sokolnicki sent out a copy of the paper on emigration in London, according to which he was appointed by his predecessor, president August Zalewski as his successor (according to Article 24 of the 1935 Constitution, according to which the president appoints his successor in the event of a threat of emptying the office before peace is made, and the peace with Germany was not signed until today, only an act of surrender, and this is not the same). Thus, he considered himself the legitimate president of the Second Republic of Poland. In 2009, Sokolnicki died and a fewer days before his death, he passed on the post of president of the Second Republic to Jan Zbigniew Potocki, by a paper drawn up with a notary. Now he claims to be the legal president of the II Republic of Poland. I don't think so. It is said that Sokolnicki renounced the position of president of the Second Republic of Poland, and if so, he had no right to hand it over to Potocki due to the fact that he was no longer serving. erstwhile MP Robert Majka acted together with Potocki for respective months, and then resigned as he felt that Potocki had not proven to be the rightful president of the Second Republic. I do not know if Potocki is the legal or illegal president of the Second Republic of Poland, but I know for a fact that the current authorities are occupyive and illegal – for example, due to the fact that Wałęsa and the another presidents of the 3rd Republic did not curse to the constitution of 23 April 1935.

One more thing to mention – the April Constitution of 1935 was passed with a violation of the principles established in its predecessor, i.e. the March Constitution of 1921. The fresh constitution had to be voted by a majority of two-thirds of the vote in the parliament, and the sanction did not then have so much and was passed by a simple majority. However, president Ignacy Mościcki signed it and became an existing legal act which was never abolished until today.